You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> on 2018/06/13 18:13:44 UTC
[CANCEL] [VOTE] Release JWT Auth 1.0.0
Will reroll without the api to avoid that discussion and to hang the
release 1 month for no technical reason, be ready to vote ;)
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
<https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
Le dim. 10 juin 2018 à 23:18, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> a
écrit :
> Yep, all ready
>
> Le dim. 10 juin 2018 20:35, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit :
>
>> the api is already dropped in our repo, right?
>>
>> If so I'll can do a release re-roll.
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>> > Am 10.06.2018 um 20:02 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> > Do we want to reroll this one without the api? Since we are almost done
>> i'd like to avoid another vote without any change impacting users but worse
>> case i can do it next week.
>> >
>> > Le mer. 6 juin 2018 13:50, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
>> a écrit :
>> > Hi John,
>> >
>> > Created https://github.com/eclipse/microprofile-jwt-auth/issues/95, it
>> is not a PR but hope it covers the issue enough.
>> >
>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
>> >
>> >
>> > Le mer. 6 juin 2018 à 13:34, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org> a
>> écrit :
>> > I'll go with a +1 if you're going to raise the PR upstream to fix the
>> eclipse JAR
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jun 6, 2018, 2:11 AM Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
>> > I already voted +1
>> >
>> > LieGrue,
>> > strub
>> >
>> >
>> > > Am 05.06.2018 um 21:35 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>:
>> > >
>> > > @John: do you change your -1 anf if not what would it need?
>> > > @Mark: any vote? ;)
>> > >
>> > > Le mar. 5 juin 2018 14:40, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
>> a écrit :
>> > > ok then +1 if as we discussed, we will try to push a PR to Eclipse so
>> we can yank the APIs from our repos
>> > >
>> > > Le mar. 5 juin 2018 à 09:33, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com> a écrit :
>> > > Le mar. 5 juin 2018 à 09:29, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
>> a écrit :
>> > > I have checked with the 1.1 release and it passes.
>> > > Looks good to me, but I believe we need to decide about the API stuff
>> before.
>> > >
>> > > Not really, what has been said before is that it was ok to release
>> and then remove if and use eclipse one if that's the outcome. This shouldnt
>> be a blocker.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > It is definitely not a bind copy of the sources, as I checked it.
>> > > But the signatures and the packages are obviously the same.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Le dim. 3 juin 2018 à 22:49, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com> a écrit :
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Le dim. 3 juin 2018 21:36, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit
>> :
>> > > Yes, John please also read my review. I've looked at the same classes
>> as well and compared them The only thing which is the same is indeed the
>> signature. So this is fine as it seems to be a rewrite. But of course I'd
>> also remove it in the future to ensure we really use the same API.
>> > >
>> > > We will need to discuss it in a dedicated thread cause there are some
>> project and technical concerns dropping it. I will start it tomorrow if
>> nobody beats me at it.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Otoh the release process on Eclipse side is rather 'sloppy'. So it's
>> hard to keep the impl up2date without having to compile snapshots of the
>> api locally.
>> > >
>> > > LieGrue,
>> > > strub
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > Am 03.06.2018 um 17:41 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>:
>> > > >
>> > > > The copied code is very localized, from memory I copied the claim
>> enum (mainly to guarantee the ordinal). Except that it is mainly a normal
>> API rewrite. Think a diff should show that it is not just copied. Also the
>> javadoc is 100% from scratch.
>> > > >
>> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > > @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Le dim. 3 juin 2018 à 17:32, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
>> a écrit :
>> > > > It looks like you imported code from Eclipse, but changed the
>> headers to indicate it's licensed to the ASF.
>> > > >
>> > > > On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 11:29 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > @John: what's the questionably part?
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > > @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Le dim. 3 juin 2018 à 17:24, John D. Ament <jo...@gmail.com>
>> a écrit :
>> > > > -1 since there's questionably licensed files in
>> https://github.com/apache/geronimo-jwt-auth/tree/master/geronimo-microprofile-jwt-auth-spec/src/main/java/org/eclipse/microprofile
>>
>> > > >
>> > > > On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 3:44 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > Up + FYI we pass the tck 1.1 so no need to do another vote just to
>> change TCK version since we dont deliver them and are compliant, yeah :)
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > > @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Le lun. 21 mai 2018 à 23:10, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com> a écrit :
>> > > > Up?
>> > > >
>> > > > Le mer. 16 mai 2018 12:20, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com> a écrit :
>> > > > Hi guys,
>> > > >
>> > > > I'd like to release geronimo-jwt-auth 1.0.0 as mentionned in
>> another mail
>> > > >
>> > > > The dist (dev) area is available at
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/jwt-auth/ (rev 26951)
>> > > > The staging repo is:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1056/
>> > > > For the duration of this vote I pushed the tag on my fork:
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau/geronimo-jwt-auth/tree/geronimo-jwt-auth-1.0.0
>> (will push it on asf once done)
>> > > > My keys is the same as last time (available in
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/KEYS)
>> > > >
>> > > > This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3
>> binding +1s.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > > @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
Re: [CANCEL] [VOTE] Release JWT Auth 1.0.0
Posted by Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Romain
Le mer. 13 juin 2018 à 20:13, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> a
écrit :
> Will reroll without the api to avoid that discussion and to hang the
> release 1 month for no technical reason, be ready to vote ;)
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>
>
> Le dim. 10 juin 2018 à 23:18, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> a écrit :
>
>> Yep, all ready
>>
>> Le dim. 10 juin 2018 20:35, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> a écrit :
>>
>>> the api is already dropped in our repo, right?
>>>
>>> If so I'll can do a release re-roll.
>>>
>>> LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>>
>>>
>>> > Am 10.06.2018 um 20:02 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>:
>>> >
>>> > Do we want to reroll this one without the api? Since we are almost
>>> done i'd like to avoid another vote without any change impacting users but
>>> worse case i can do it next week.
>>> >
>>> > Le mer. 6 juin 2018 13:50, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
>>> a écrit :
>>> > Hi John,
>>> >
>>> > Created https://github.com/eclipse/microprofile-jwt-auth/issues/95,
>>> it is not a PR but hope it covers the issue enough.
>>> >
>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> > @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Le mer. 6 juin 2018 à 13:34, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org> a
>>> écrit :
>>> > I'll go with a +1 if you're going to raise the PR upstream to fix the
>>> eclipse JAR
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Jun 6, 2018, 2:11 AM Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
>>> > I already voted +1
>>> >
>>> > LieGrue,
>>> > strub
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > > Am 05.06.2018 um 21:35 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>:
>>> > >
>>> > > @John: do you change your -1 anf if not what would it need?
>>> > > @Mark: any vote? ;)
>>> > >
>>> > > Le mar. 5 juin 2018 14:40, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
>>> a écrit :
>>> > > ok then +1 if as we discussed, we will try to push a PR to Eclipse
>>> so we can yank the APIs from our repos
>>> > >
>>> > > Le mar. 5 juin 2018 à 09:33, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com> a écrit :
>>> > > Le mar. 5 juin 2018 à 09:29, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
>>> a écrit :
>>> > > I have checked with the 1.1 release and it passes.
>>> > > Looks good to me, but I believe we need to decide about the API
>>> stuff before.
>>> > >
>>> > > Not really, what has been said before is that it was ok to release
>>> and then remove if and use eclipse one if that's the outcome. This shouldnt
>>> be a blocker.
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > It is definitely not a bind copy of the sources, as I checked it.
>>> > > But the signatures and the packages are obviously the same.
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > Le dim. 3 juin 2018 à 22:49, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com> a écrit :
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > Le dim. 3 juin 2018 21:36, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> a
>>> écrit :
>>> > > Yes, John please also read my review. I've looked at the same
>>> classes as well and compared them The only thing which is the same is
>>> indeed the signature. So this is fine as it seems to be a rewrite. But of
>>> course I'd also remove it in the future to ensure we really use the same
>>> API.
>>> > >
>>> > > We will need to discuss it in a dedicated thread cause there are
>>> some project and technical concerns dropping it. I will start it tomorrow
>>> if nobody beats me at it.
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > Otoh the release process on Eclipse side is rather 'sloppy'. So it's
>>> hard to keep the impl up2date without having to compile snapshots of the
>>> api locally.
>>> > >
>>> > > LieGrue,
>>> > > strub
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > > Am 03.06.2018 um 17:41 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > The copied code is very localized, from memory I copied the claim
>>> enum (mainly to guarantee the ordinal). Except that it is mainly a normal
>>> API rewrite. Think a diff should show that it is not just copied. Also the
>>> javadoc is 100% from scratch.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> > > > @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Le dim. 3 juin 2018 à 17:32, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
>>> a écrit :
>>> > > > It looks like you imported code from Eclipse, but changed the
>>> headers to indicate it's licensed to the ASF.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 11:29 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > > > @John: what's the questionably part?
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> > > > @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Le dim. 3 juin 2018 à 17:24, John D. Ament <jo...@gmail.com>
>>> a écrit :
>>> > > > -1 since there's questionably licensed files in
>>> https://github.com/apache/geronimo-jwt-auth/tree/master/geronimo-microprofile-jwt-auth-spec/src/main/java/org/eclipse/microprofile
>>>
>>> > > >
>>> > > > On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 3:44 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > > > Up + FYI we pass the tck 1.1 so no need to do another vote just to
>>> change TCK version since we dont deliver them and are compliant, yeah :)
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> > > > @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Le lun. 21 mai 2018 à 23:10, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com> a écrit :
>>> > > > Up?
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Le mer. 16 mai 2018 12:20, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com> a écrit :
>>> > > > Hi guys,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > I'd like to release geronimo-jwt-auth 1.0.0 as mentionned in
>>> another mail
>>> > > >
>>> > > > The dist (dev) area is available at
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/jwt-auth/ (rev 26951)
>>> > > > The staging repo is:
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1056/
>>> > > > For the duration of this vote I pushed the tag on my fork:
>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau/geronimo-jwt-auth/tree/geronimo-jwt-auth-1.0.0
>>> (will push it on asf once done)
>>> > > > My keys is the same as last time (available in
>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/KEYS)
>>> > > >
>>> > > > This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3
>>> binding +1s.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Thanks,
>>> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> > > > @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>>